the choice he made to come here says you are somebody who faces challenges and it does not run. there is nothing we need more than people who are ready to face challenges. let me close by saying you will not be alone. you are members of a family. the people who are here are ran the will be the same in the course of your life. they have always been here. yes, your family and your friends and the teachers and their mentors and it now your fellow graduates. there is no where i would rather be than this moment. so happy to celebrate with you today the class of 2012. i look forward to seeing what you will accomplish in hearing your stories. i wish you luck and some much more than luck. thank you very much. congratulations. [cheers and applause]

>> the next, pending the energy legislation with lisa murkowski.l michigan senator debbie stabenow and pat roberts the above the joint effort to push a farm bill through the senate appeared it would replace the subsidies to farmers and a program that would pay farmers of their incomes fall below certain levels. sunday at 10:00 a.m. on c-span. >> the b-52, everybody thinks back to vietnam.

they think linebacker. i think of the history of the b- 52. there is a different kind of power associated with the be fitted to as opposed to other long-range bombers. >> two friends who knew each other prior to the civil war fought against and 1862. here they are sitting on the porch talking abut the old days. >> the one to the west is 903. they really --

the energy department should abandon its lawn program. it is what lent money to cylinder. speaking at any event by the law firm, they explain why she is the expected budget legislation to pass this year. this is about one hour. >> energy and energy policies several the shipped the modern history over the past centuries. the 21st century it has been questionable how we manage our energy resources, what kind of an economy we build. the decree of the dependents or independence from foreign oil sources will be a current -- critical determinant of our policy and the health of our economy and and the long term

the health of the entire ecosystem. these are crucial issues. it will need to be lulled by the fact it feels like long-term issues, this is temptation to always say, yes, it is important. that is a can that can be kicked down the road. somewhere in the 21st century the issues will become crucial to our country and the planet. the earlier we thought we would for its intelligent policies to manage our resources to help officially to resources possible and to shift where ever possible feasible to breathe new resources, the less serious the problem is for generations that that will face. i think it will be safe to say that one of the crucial indicators of the success of the country ultimately will be whether we take on the challenges and manage energy

resources effectively in our country. it is my pleasure to welcome you all here. a great meeting. i have to come in and out but, this is a meeting that will help form us and control policy- making. is my honor to actually introduce a fellow senator who will offer a few remarks. thank you. [applause] >> thank you very much. it is nice to see all of you here. thank you for partnering with us for this energy summit. two years ago i was chairing the senate panel that funded our energy projects in this country. the ranking member of that panel -- two years later we

worked together at aaron fox that proves it is not really dead outside of the senate. today we put together an energy forum that asks the question in a keynote address, what is ahead? what is ahead in energy policy? a panel that asks about tax incentives. what does the future hold for tax incentives? senator bennett and i will take a couple of minutes to from the discussion and that we will have secretary salazar and the panel discussion. he was once asked to define success. he said is very simple. the to the best school you can find and do well and find a job and exceeded everyone's expectations and strike oil. by all accounts, america has had

a substantial major success recently. we have struck oil and oil and natural gas and away nobody could ever predict. we have a four times the number of drilling rigs in america than three years ago. more drilling rigs in america that are drilling in the rest of the entire world, think of that. we are producing more energy both the public lands -- public lands and private lands. more energy than we were producing before. more energy than anybody ever would have predicted. it is the case that imports of gone from 60% of our energy use to 45%. i come from a part of the country that has had a significant role and that. i think it is the most significant oil play in the world. when i describe it to you it is a 100 ft seem of loose shale two

miles below the surface. they go down 10,000 feet and make a curve. down two miles, out two miles searching for the battlefield of a scene. the and the hydraulic fracture it and force grains of sand up into the shale. the oil drops and they are from drilling 200 a year. everything has changed. nobody in this room whatever predicted. is the impact of the highly improbable. what will our future be? it will not mirror our past or our present. what do we do and how do we make sure we have gridder energy security and national security? it is the case that increased production is a bounty for our country. it changes a lot of things. it is also the case what has

contributed to this security as greater fuel efficiency of vehicles. everyone understands it has had a significant impact. the renewable fuel standard, i was the author of the renewable fuel standard with two of my colleagues has had a profound -- profound impact. time% comes from biofuels. it has had a significant impact on supply and energy. no matter what we produce or how much we produce with respect to oil and natural gas, the price of oil is an international price. therefore, for energy security and national security, we need a plan that emphasizes productions, fossil fuels as well, but also production of

renewable energy. it is the case one could say, well, we are doing so well defining success we can rest on our laurels and do what we have been doing in that will be fine. 90% of oil products a used in transportation in the united states. people living in india and china want to drive cars. the very much want to drive cars. project a few short years ahead and it project 3-4 million additional automobiles driving on this planet looking for a gas station once a week. ask yourself whether we need an energy security plan that represents national security that uses the verse sets of energy available to us. when the, solar, bio thermal, the areas of biofuels, all of those areas are areas we ought

to produce. they would come as a result of substantial research that bob and i paid a lot of attention to. i believe our feature is an energy research. let me just ask you the question, can you think our future might mean our feature will find a way to extract liquid fuels from the air? we are working on it and research. how about the development of a 500 mile battery for a vehicle? maybe not, but maybe. how about using solar power at night. does that sound crazy? we had the opportunity to fund our laboratories. those are the crown jewels and the research going on. i am a big fan of the research. i think that will have a lot to do with your we have. it is a perfect time to say,

what next? as often said there is an old cherokee chief that said, the success of a ring -- the success of a rain dance depends on timing. let me introduce my colleague, one i have worked along go while. [cheers and applause] >> i am delighted to join you. we both left the senate to get there. he did it voluntarily. i did it happily.

aaron fox recruited us. they were looking for somebody on each side of the aisle. be recreated the kind of relationship he has discussed. the interesting things as we left, the action is not necessarily in the congress. the action on driving forward out many of these issues lies outside of the congress right now as they continue to sort out exactly when they will answer the next. deal with the political gridlock that has taken over. i have always had an interest and energy and i am delighted to be where an edgy has a high

profile. let me share with you in this perspective about where we are right now. we are at a time of the enormous flax. the enormous change. to give you a few indications of that. in the senate over the years we talk about energy. we were in a situation where an edgy prices, particularly the price of oil were all set outside the united states. that is not historically true. there was a time when the texas railroad commission could determine the price of oil. the main source came out of texas, oklahoma and was priced by the railroad commission. i do not know. that is texas. they could determine by the kinds of allocations they made how much oil could be produced

and what the price of oil would be. that shifted away from the united states and into saudi arabia. partly because we were running out and texas. the opec states decided to try their hand at creating a cartel. the center of gravity, pricing power particularly with respect to oil shifted away from the united states. we were left at the mercy of someone else's decision. now, they have already described what has happened to production. for the first time, we are experts -- exporting energy. we are exporting and agee. we have enough to not only take care of ourselves. we have energy being created so that in a market fashion there

can be exports. the technology has made enormous changes. the discovery is very important. but the ability to get natural gas out of shale has changed the question tremendously. i remember as recently as the stimulus package when byron and i put in loan guarantees for nuclear into the stimulus package -- nancy pelosi took it out. it was on the senate side, it has changed the entire debate with respect to nuclear and its role. people are looking back and nuclear. what do we do and the safety and all those issues. we are in a period of enormous turmoil and change. the technological improvements

keep coming through the door. we see clients come up and have new technology they need a patent help or they need guidance in making their contracts and with their suppliers, contracts with foreign governments. we are seeing a tremendous change in the private sector and how people deal with energy. i was in europe. i was attending the brussels form. that is put it on every year in brussels. i am on the board of that. i go to the forum. one of the issues that is discussed his energy. i will not bore you with all the things that was sent, but this interesting comment by the woman facilitating. after the panel had made their presentation and they were and

the question and answer. and it was going on, she stopped long enough to make this observation. she said, all right. last year when we were here talking about energy, everything was russia, russia, russia. this year, listen to yourself, everything is china, china, china. all right to it. it is an entire situation of what the entire world is changing. that is why we are delighted that we have been able to talk to our two former colleagues, and they get them to give us guidance as to what they see the future might be. to not be presumptuous as to ask lisa who will win the election.

if the republicans win the election lisa will be the chairman of the senate energy and natural resources committee. if they do not she will remain as the ranking member. and of course do not ask saleh certification who will win the election because his job, too, depends on the outcome of that. both of them as they look ahead have a sense of where things are going. from personal experience dealing with them while we were colleagues and the senate, byron and i know these are two people. they are not ideologues in the sense that have blinders on we have to do it in this way. both of them are open to, maybe it could happen this way and look and opportunities in the way to go. our program is to have said term

rakowski for a bout 20 mets out of the 30 she is allowed and it will open led to questions and answers. she will be followed by secretary sella's are. at the same time, he can have some opening, and said we will do our guests to go to the question and answer. and, at to see what senator has arrived debt. being a senator, i can go on before as long as you need. that is that a problem at all. the recognition that he talked

about, but the importance of energy in the economy. if you look at the economy and an overall circumstance, you see that access to cheap energy has been a driving force and building the economy ever since we enter the industrial age. one of the challenges we have had politically and economically has been the the uncertainty of that access. it hit us with the oil embargo that came in the 1970's during the nixon administration. it was not just the price that went up dramatically, it was the uncertainty that went up. with the uncertainty began to get changes in the marketplace that came as a result of the fact there are many industries that absolutely have to have energy. that is not given to what the

economists call the elastic demand it. if you're running an airline you have to have jet fuel. you cannot say, we will cut back a little on jet fuel. you have to have it. for many people in the way america is structured you have to have enough gasoline to put in your car to get to work. >> we do not kid to and from many other way. i was in the nixon administration in the department of transportation and everyone was talking about airlines, kaelin, rail transportation. i remember when writing at the train and this is how you got from one city to add the -- passenger rail. during the time i was there,

amtrak was created by shrinking all of the male -- rail service in the country. it was not the airlines. the thing that detroit rail service was the interstate highway system. over a 95% of intercity trips in the united states are by car. not by an error. you can i do if that is a good thing or bad thing, but it transformed america in a very fundamental way. our former colleague wants said, everybody was a passive president aware as kennedy and johnson more active presence. eisenhower sent there by kennedy and johnson -- eisenhower changed the country more than anything kennedy and johnson did perched to get there when he

built the highway system. he transformed the way americans live the, traded, whole industries. it created boom cities here had an entirely different stores and then if you're on song. that was the 1950 policy. edition not just cause some price change. the fact we are getting on top of our energy supplies and getting into a position where we can determine our own future is an enormous game changer in

this. 50 years later. we are seeing all of this come in increased of protection? the always voted against the meeting had always intended -- all of the legal and economic issues connected with that are something that we hope we will fall away from this forum with a slightly better understanding of. so we appreciate you coming. we appreciate you being here and we look forward to your

questions. is the chart up did our due i continue to filibuster? clocks i do know how much of the speech to have left. most of us in politics to go for at least a half an hour. i was thinking if i might tell you a short story while waiting out lisa >> this will be a very short. ladies and gentlemen, one of our very best friends, lisa, the ranking member of the senate energy committee. we expect she will tell us all. [applause]

>> i am delighted to be back with my colleagues. i miss you both. you served on the energy committee together and senator dorgan. he left some good policy when he was chairman of the indian affairs committee. i miss you but i am glad to know you are carrying on in a good manner here with this forum. i appreciate it. i have been invited this morning to give a general outlook on energy policy. i think what is certain is a lot of members from both parties have been thinking through legislative responses to our various energy practices. those challenges remain pretty

considerable. when we think about what we face as a nation and the energy issues that presented themselves, i think it comes down to some key things. it is mockeries science here. we are looking to -- we are looking to keep energy affordable and insure the safety of its production. we need to maintain the balance in the federal regulations that are affecting him. for all the talk about energy policy there has not been much action of late i think one of the more common refrain to wall here today in discussions is that the at this stage really does not have a policy of the federal level, at least long-

term and coherent. recognizing that, to look at ways they can read mail was started by looking at energy plans put forth by each administration as well as the energy legislation that has passed each congress since the 1970's it. we elected the resources that the united states has. we looked at the federal policies to identify gas. elected how energy affects our economy and the critical importance to our growth and prosperity. today i am more convinced than ever many improvements can and

should be made. i am also sure that energy policy cannot be part it has to be an area of agreement i think the girls are pretty straightforward. i am i using that. abundance, energy will allow us to meet our growing demands an increased standard of living. we would all recognize it is a must for our families and businesses i would probably define clean energy as a little

bit differently than many of you and perhaps some of my colleagues in this area are essential. our nation has dramatically addressed our pollution overtime secure energy produced domestically will provide for the stronger hand on the in our national stage and ensure we are fewer and funeral dollars flow out of our economy. it will all take long. it will take patience and the federal but i think we need to be serious to of history i think our competitiveness are truly on the line. wanting a was a chest i will not

tell you why resources, which renounces, which is that policy will enable us to meet some other will be laid the often the edge to catch a plan to release her markets and consumers will make the choice far better than anyone else. what policy makers need to do is focus on the outcome. we should not be open to a number of routes that could help us get there. let's focus on the first, the

process out there, is there for a reason. the last two and energy bills to be signed into law and the seven and in a five will senate before. we have also seen that typically these efforts fall short. committees have the right ideas and the expertise. they simply cannot produce a better product. as markets are held moderately. the fifth our efforts have to be balanced. it is difficult to see legislation that is purely focused on a several technology, subsidy, or drawing enough support to last. i think we have, and legislation

is focused on innovation. if we can agree to do that, i think we have the makings of a package that most members will be comfortable with. you have to find a balance there. the past several years of think we have seen remarkable advances in new technology is like a horizontal boom it is also true the government played a role in the early stages of development when there is less reason for the private sector to be interested. the appliances should be

effected today. they can help our research that cannot be undertaken. cough our job is to not offer subsidies than ever endure the technology that steps up every step of the way. a good example to look to my be -- we have partners that test the prospect. them pretty tough, they will never involves several pigeons to companies to produce her deliver them. related this is my fourth going that our energy policy simply have to paper themselves. they have probably had much less

impact than projected. many taxpayers reverse seeing it now. they are rightly unhappy with the results of the spending. howard a. should fear a city by 15 trillion dollars a debt. we did have the luxury to spend clearly. we need to be bringing creative food by addressing supply and demand at the same time. i have an aura administration. directly or in the creases, it increases the flood of energy. high gasoline prices have shed our families to the brink.

of cnn and almost $10 a gallon, off an orange a broker and we are seeing a craze to the house payment we see. given how important energy is to the overall economy. how it helps determine the east price of all other goods and services. if should be to lower the cost of energy and not even race in any further. whether or not we have brought forth for consideration and is that it is shaping up to look

the same unfortunately. we have reported dozens of bills on a bipartisan basis. a where are they? we're not seeing them as through. they are languishing on the floor. even as the house passes bill after bill addressing traditional and renewable energy, the best the senate has been able to really pull together at this point in time has been a brief debate on a handful of energy related amendments that were called up during debate over the highway bill. that is as close as we have done this year. if you want to find success on energy policy. the senate will have to do better than they have been. it seems easiest and obvious. we actually have to set aside some time to debate legislation.

the big question of course is whether or not it is even possible this can happen. i would like to think the senate could find the time over the next six months to debate energy. given the past months we have seen that, it is probably not likely. i am generally optimistic in their room. i am also the pragmatist. we are looking at whether or not there might be some possibilities and the lame duck. i am in the category that says, i do not think that is where we will see much of anything happening with energy legislation here. so much of our attention has shifted to the fiscal cliff that we are moving towards. seven trillion dollars worth of taxes and spending that need to be made before the end of the

year. there may be some time for an energy related amendment here or there. i think the bulk of our time is probably going to be taken up with other issues and other concerns. the success i have outlined here this morning, i do not think should be difficult for either party to accept or accomplish. the largely fall in line with what americans are asking if they do not dramatically restrict the legislative options that are open to us. one good sign is that more and more of us are talking about and all of the above policy. we started using terminology on the republican side years ago. the president is using it. the administration uses it. is good. we need to do more than just talk about it. we need to step up and show it is a serious goal. we need to take our words and

translate them into meaningful policies. with the senate enactive alleges -- energy legislation, we have had a lot of time to think about what actually makes good policy. i think it is a good sign that some many of you are thinking about this as well. we have some serious challenges to overcome. i think a will take all of us again. beyond that party boundaries. beyond regional boundaries. it will test all of us working together to forge a consensus to ensure our supply can meet the demand in a growing world. with that, i thank you for your attention this morning. i am happy to take questions if it is appropriate. i know i am followed by my good friend secretary salazar. i am curious as to why he will share with us. squawks let's see who wants to

ask questions. we have some romney microphones. who might ask a question on this side? that will men back there. you ask your question while she is getting her microphone. >> thank you very much. i. margaret allen. you talked to by the lack of action on the floor. on many bills coming out of the energy committee. why do they not get action? >> why do they not get action? i think part of it is competition with other issues. i think part of it is a failure or to make it a priority.

energy issues have not be made a priority by the majority. he is the one who says the schedule. he is the one who makes the determination as to what we are going to be bringing up next. it has not been high on his priority list which i think is unfortunate. we have a bill -- the measure they should be important to have been working for a couple of years now. they have passed through the committee on a bipartisan basis. it is pretty small. what we are talking about had what we can make with the efficiencies and conservation this is a good bill. we are not able to get the attention even for something like that. i think it is an issue of competing priorities. not putting it as high on the list as many of us would like. >> you have the microphone.

let's find somebody over here. ok. you get the microphone. >> i appreciate what you said about looking at all of the above and thinking about different options. when i listen to what you are saying it was much more focused on domestic world production, and then the only mention of renewable energy was saying you did not feel that the stimulus was as effective as they had hoped. i guess i am wondering how you would balance the idea of all of the above and were you see renewable energy sitting into that whole debate. >> given that our comments were very brief, truly just a couple of examples. the examples i chose to use for what you picked up on. i am a huge advocate for renewable energy.

advancing through a process that i did not think is very even- handed right now. that is why i was talking about balance and, those determinations we have had the federal government make that did not want to sit at the direction we ought to be taking is e electric plug and the pickles as opposed to the votes that are run on natural gas. i do not think we should make the determination. what i am the -- when i am suggesting is that everything be advanced in a way that allows for the market and consumers to determine where we are going. renewable energy is the energy of the future. in saying that, we have to appreciate that we are not going to be able to flip the switch and empower everything in this room. half of solar or wind or what

ever our renewable energy sources are. it is an excess of transition. it is a timely transition. how do we get there when we are sitting there with a debt that we have? one of the things i have proposes that we take and fans of some of the revenues we derive from fossil fuels whether it is energy of no. or whether it is energy in the appellations, let's take some of what we are taking from the ground to help advance the r&d for a real bull so that we can move in that direction in a meaningful way. right now, it is a little bit of a tax credit here for a couple of years. in terms of any kind of funding certainty, there is not any. i am trying to build it out. all we can bill the dow is using our traditional fuels, revenues from them, to help build our

renewable spirit -- to help build out our renewable said. >> thank you for your time. a had a question related to what your thoughts are. based on the comments he made today. >> as he now, the senator has introduced his legislation on clean and as rigid cleaned industry standards. i think he will be the first to admit he clearly did in the committee, the clean energy legislation he introduced is not going to be moving this congress. what he wanted to do was put it out on the table for discussion to move that issue forward. he and i last year after the president talked about clean energy standards, we issued a

request for comment from step:send people within the industry, tell us what a clean energy standard will look like. this was an effort i was willing to engage with. i thought it was important to try to understand. is this an area where we can find a consensus appeared we got pretty incredible feedback. we did not give back a consensus on what it would look like or what it would work. even within industries, and even within sector is of the industry, there was night level of consensus. i kind of pulled back. the senator introduces legislation. i have concerns with primarily the fact that the legislation

does not allow for pre-emption of of the standards that might be out there. yes or concerned will we have a tendency to do around here in washington is impose a regulation, another one comes on, and you have an overlap that makes it not only complicated but often impossible to get your goal. if we're going to advance the concept, i would like to make sure that we know what that definition is but it is not complicated by other standards that have been put into place. alecky preemption in there. >> you have the microphone in the back. let's go to her. >> thank you for that over review.

my question will follow -- what are your thoughts about addressing demand issues and also energy conservation and efficiency? to what extent will both play a role in policy discussions? >> this goes to my point earlier a bout the legislation that i think is just good stuff that helps move us towards greater conservation, greater efficiencies. yet we are not able to move that through the process. we need to go to those areas where the low hanging fruit exists. we need to realize the greatest

savings is not the technology that will build on some superstate thing, it is saving the energy we have it. we are pretty wasteful as a society when it comes to us as consumers. i do not think we have done enough. when i speak of and all of the above policy, in my mind it is a three legged stool. you have increased domestic production from the more traditional sources. you clearly have the leg that is the future that is renewable sources. the third leg has to be conservation and efficiency. we can do so much more. i would like to get some of those pieces moving. i think they should be the easier pieces. unfortunately that has not proved out yet. >> something happened. let's go.

have the microphone there. who should we take the microphone to over here? ray here. >> hello. we have asked you about the climate for renewable energy. you mention the stimulus. there has been some disappointments with the lime program. your plan for balance, you were talking about are in the. i was just wondering given what we have seen, where you have seen the federal government's goal? >> i do believe there is a role. perhaps setting apart some of our other colleagues on capitol hill. i do believe there is a role. what we need to determine is, how long we play in this.

when you think about some of the tax credits that are in play right now for some of the renewals, we have put them in place. when we talk about removing them or they are going to expire, there is a hue and cry. you cannot pull the rug out from underneath us. there has to be a path out. i think that is important to determine. i do believe whether it is long guarantees -- unfortunately what we have seen this past year with some of the failures within the law on guarantee program, it is tainted. i think the whole program to the point where some are suggesting

it just needs to be pulled, i do not think that is the case. we need to make sure the program operates as congress had intended. as is intended within the department to allow for these technologies to move forward and actually get to the point where it is more than just propping up an idea. an industry can take it and run with it. the timing on it, there is no clear bright line. i think right now we are not being as helpful as the government should be in not providing some greater parameters to -- i guess the extent of the guarantees, the extent of the subsidies that are out there.

we need to do a better job here. >> we go here. >> i teach energy law at the law school. i have a follow up question to the gentleman. i think you are talking about the value of -- your ramp up to commercialization there is a lot of technology and other risks. your colleague has proposed a clean energy deployment administration. i do not know what your position is. >> that is an initiative we have been working on. i think it makes sense it. let's figure out how we can help to facilitate the are in the, make sure -- let's make sure the

are and d are together. it is one way that we have explored that might offer us some possibilities. i wish i could tell you rigid vessel think it is a good idea. >> [unintelligible]

>> i think we need to critically evaluate what is that we have in front of us whether offshore -- you are making the distinction between offshore and what we see on ramp. geothermal is a situation that is not too dissimilar. we are told while the geothermal technology is a mature technology. because it is mature, we will not make available certain incentives are the tax cuts out there.

what we have found in alaska where we have enormous geothermal potential is that, well, the way you may have approached it in another state is not exactly what we are trying to do to prove out to access and alaska. that should fall into a different category. think we need to be critical as we access where it is in this process of development. >> i would like to get your thoughts on what the role of the federal government should be as opposed -- >> i am looking for somebody to get the next microphone.

>> i want to get your role of what the federal government should be asked to regulatory -- regulating energy environments with hydraulic pressure in? other areas that are specific to alaska? >> i have taken a position that with hydraulic fracking that has been going on for decades out in texas, the have been engaged for 40 years. up in wyoming the same. state regulators have been a pretty good job. they have worked well. they have worked well with the industry in ensuring state guards -- safeguards are matched on a level of disclosure is afforded. my concern is that, again, we

have an oveap piled on when we are talking about different regulations. if they have been doing a good job, is it necessary for us to come and, the epa and impose different layers of regulation on top of what the state are already doing that and appropriately doing? if you are aware, the proposal came out some weeks ago now to review the fracking on federal lands. different then on state lands. we understand that. if we are doing the is imposing regulations that are further complicating the process because it is the the duplicative or a

level of redundancy that does not make sense, are we really helping here, that is what we need to be looking into. states are doing a pretty good job. they have been doing so for a long period of time. you do have some in the country wherefracking -- the question is, what kind of disclosure is going on in the states. what are the regulations. again, i am won the says it is best to leave it with the states.